Favre-Averaged Navier-Stokes and

Turbulence Model Equation Documentation

Todd A. Oliver

September 29, 2009
Contents
1 Introduction 2
2 The Favre-Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations 3
2.1 Statistical Representation of Turbulence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.2 Reynolds and Favre Averages . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
2.3 Single-Species, Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
2.4 Newtonian, Perfect Gas Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
3 Common Closure Hypotheses 9
4 The Spalart-Allmaras One-Equation Turbulence Model 11
4.1 Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.2 The Original (Incompressible) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
4.3 The Baseline Compressible Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
4.4 Compressibility Corrections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5 The Turbulent Kinetic Energy Equation 12
5.1 The Exact TKE Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
5.2 The Model TKE Equation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13
6 The k- Two-Equation Turbulence Model 14
6.1 Closure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.2 The Wilcox Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
6.3 Menters Shear Stress Transport (SST) Model . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
7 Equation Summary 16
7.1 Spalart-Allmaras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
7.2 k- (Wilcox) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
7.3 k- (Menter/SST) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Institute for Computational Engineering and Sciences, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, TX 78712
(oliver@ices.utexas.edu)
1
Notation
Throughout the document, the Einstein summation convention is used. Thus, repeated indices imply sum-
mation. For example,

ji
u
i
=
j1
u
1
+
j2
u
2
+
j3
u
3
.
All uncertain parameters and equations associated with the turbulence model are highlighted in red.
Objective
The purpose of this document is to detail the the Favre-averaged Navier-Stokes (FANS) equations and some
popular turbulence models used to close the FANS equations. These equations will be implemented in
HyFlow as part of a model for compressible, turbulent ows.
Much of the analysis given hereparticularly the description of the averaging procedures and the FANS
equationsessentially recapitulates material from standard textbooks (see, e.g. [17, 8, 13, 23]). Furthermore,
the turbulence models described are frequently used in the computational uid dynamics (CFD) community.
Where appropriate, multiple versions of a single basic model are given. However, none of the models
described are original to this work. Thus, the goal of this document is not to give new results. Rather,
the goal is to provide a clear description of the equations to be implemented and the assumptions inherent
in those equations. For those not familiar with typical averaging procedures, etc., used in the turbulence
literature, enough details are provided that the derivations of the mean ow equations should be clear. The
turbulence models used to close the mean ow equations cannot be rigorously derived from rst principles.
These models are constructed based on dimensional analysis, invariance arguments, physical analogies, and
empirical observation. For brevity, this process is not described for any of the models considered. Throughout
the work, references to the original model developments are provided for the interested reader. However, the
documentation here is self-contained in that the model equations are entirely specied.
Finally, this work contains only the specication of the model partial dierential equations (pdes) and
required constitutive relationships. Certainly, to complete the model for any specic case an appropriate
set of boundary conditions is required. Furthermore, since the model equations are amenable to analytic
solution techniques in only the simplest cases, procedures for discretization of the equations and numerical
solution of the resulting system of algebraic equations are necessary. These are substantial topics in their
own right and are left to separate documentation.
1 Introduction
Turbulence is of interest to the PECOS Center because it is known to have a signicant impact on the ow
around the CEV during entry into Earths atmosphere. Turbulence will impact the quantity of interestthe
thermal protection system (TPS) recession ratein a number of ways. Relative to laminar ow, all ow
processes are aected by the enhanced transport of mass, momentum, and energy due to turbulence. For
example, turbulence will cause an increase in the mean temperature gradient near the wall, leading to a
signicant increase in the heat ux to the TPS. In addition, the enhanced mixing due to turbulence will
have an important eect on the distribution of chemical species through the boundary layer, thus aecting
the chemical reactions occurring in the boundary layer and at the surface of the TPS.
For these reasons, it is important to account for turbulence in CEV atmospheric entry simulations.
It is accepted that the Navier-Stokes equations represent a highly accurate model of the uid mechanics of
turbulent ow in the continuum regime. However, due to the large range of scales present, the computational
time and resources required for the direct numerical simulation (DNS)i.e., the resolution of all relevant
scalesof the Navier-Stokes equations at high Reynolds number are generally not available. Thus, less
complete models are required. In engineering, the most common approach is to solve the Favre-averaged
Navier-Stokes (FANS) equations coupled with an eddy viscosity turbulence model.
2
This document describes the FANS equations and a number of eddy viscosity turbulence models. In
particular, Section 2 derives the FANS equations from the Navier-Stokes equations. The equations are
shown for a generic single-species uid in local thermodynamic equilibriumi.e., there is a single, well-
dened temperature at each point in time and space and only a single energy equation is requiredand for
the particular case of a Newtonian, ideal gas. These equations will be extended to the multi-species, real gas
case in subsequent modeling documents. As noted in Section 2, the FANS equations are not closed. Common
closure hypotheses are discussed in Section 3. The rest of the document is devoted to the turbulence models
used to compute the unknown parameters in the closure hypotheses, namely the eddy viscosity and the
turbulent kinetic energy (TKE). In particular, Section 4 describes the Spalart-Allmaras (SA) one-equation
model. Then, Section 5 introduces the TKE equation, which is the basis of the k- models described
Section 6. Finally, Section 7 distills the equations into one place, giving a complete listing of the equations
for all of the models described.
2 The Favre-Averaged Navier-Stokes Equations
This section describes the the FANS equations. The motivation for and interpretation of the statistical
description of turbulent ows are briey reviewed, and the Reynolds and Favre averages are dened. Using
these tools, the FANS equations are derived. For further details on deriving mean ow equations, see any
text on turbulent ows, e.g. [17, 8, 13, 23].
2.1 Statistical Representation of Turbulence
At large Reynolds number, solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations take on a chaotic nature, becoming
highly sensitive to both initial and boundary conditions. In practice, the eect of this sensitivity is to make
the value of any ow quantity at any particular point in time and space uncertain. Thus, these quantities
may be viewed as random variables with associated probability density functions (pdfs), allowing the use
of statistical techniques in the description and analysis of the ow. It is emphasized that the Navier-Stokes
equations are deterministic, implying that the relevant physical processes are not inherently random. Thus,
the uncertainty enters because of the combination of the chaotic nature of the governing equations and the
practical impossibility of fully and exactly describing the initial and boundary conditions of any real ow.
2.2 Reynolds and Favre Averages
The Reynolds average is simply the usual mean of a random variable. Consider a generic ow variable q. The
value, q(x, t), of this variable at a particular point in space, x, and time, t, is a random variable. Assuming
that the pdf for q(x, t) is given by
q
(V ; x, t), the Reynolds average is dened by
q(x, t)
_
V
q
(V ; x, t) dV. (1)
The Favre average is dened as the density-weighted average. Thus, denoting the uid density by (x, t),
the Favre average of q(x, t) is
q(x, t)
q(x, t)
(x, t)
.
For the remainder of this work to make sense mathematically, it is assumed that both the Reynolds and
Favre averages are well-dened for any required ow variable, q. That is, the integral on the right-hand side
of (1) exists whenever required, and the Reynolds-averaged density, , is positive everywhere.
In the following, the ow variables will be decomposed into mean and uctuating parts. Specically, the
uctuations about the meandenoted by ()

and ()

for the Reynolds and Favre averages, respectivelyare

3
dened by the following relationships:
q

q q,
q

q q.
Using the linearity of the Reynolds average and the fact that q and q are deterministic, not random, variables,
it is straightforward to see that
q

= q q = q q = 0,

q q = q q = 0.
Furthermore,
q

= 0.
However, in general,
q

= q q = q q = 0.
Finally, wherever necessary, realizations of random elds of ow quantitiese.g., u
i
, p,
ij
, etc.are as-
sumed to be dierentiable in both time and space. Thus, the average and dierentiation operators commute.
For example,

u
i
x
j
=
u
i
x
j
.
This operation is used extensively in the development of the FANS equations.
2.3 Single-Species, Local Thermodynamic Equilibrium Case
Assuming there are no body forces or heat sources, the equations describing the conservation of mass,
momentum, and energy for a single-species continuum ow in local thermodynamic equilibrium are as follows:

t
+

x
i
(u
i
) = 0, (2)

t
(u
i
) +

x
j
(u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

ji
x
j
, (3)

t
(E) +

x
j
(u
j
H) =

x
j
(
ji
u
i
)
q
j
x
j
, (4)
where is the uid density, u
i
denotes the velocity vector, p is the pressure,
ij
is the viscous stress tensor,
q
j
is the heat ux vector, E is the total energy per unit mass, and H is the total enthalpy per unit mass.
Specically,
E = e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
,
H = h +
1
2
u
i
u
i
= e +
p

+
1
2
u
i
u
i
,
where e is the internal energy per unit mass and h is the enthalpy per unit mass.
To close the equations, many additional relationships are necessarye.g., a constitutive relation for the
viscous stress, an equation of state, etc. For the remainder of this section, these additional equations are
purposefully left unspecied such that the mean ow equations derived are independent of these details. The
specic case of a Newtonian, perfect gas is considered in Section 2.4.
4
Conservation of Mass Decomposing the velocity into its Favre average and the corresponding uctuation
and taking the Reynolds average of the conservation of mass equation gives

t
+

x
i
( u
i
+ u

i
) = 0.
Using results from Section 2.2, one can show that

t
+

x
i
( u
i
+ u

i
) =

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) +

x
i
(u

i
) =

t
+

x
i
( u
i
).
Thus, the Favre-averaged conservation of mass equation is

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0.
Conservation of Momentum Decomposing the velocity into its Favre average and the corresponding
uctuation and taking the Reynolds average of the conservation of momentum equation gives

t
(( u
i
+ u

i
)) +

x
j
_
( u
j
+ u

j
)( u
i
+ u

i
)
_
=
p
x
i
+

ji
x
j
,
which implies that

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
_
u
j
u
i
+ u

j
u

i
_
=
p
x
i
+

ji
x
j
.
It is customary to rearrange the equation such that the correlation term u

j
u

i
, referred to as the Reynolds
stress, appears on the right hand side. Thus, the Favre-averaged conservation of momentum is given by

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
(
ji
u

j
u

i
).
Conservation of Energy The procedure for deriving the Favre-averaged conservation of energy equation
is exactly the same as that applied to conservation of mass and conservation of momentum. However, the
details are slightly more involved. For clarity, the derivation is shown term-by-term using the following
labeling:

t
(E)
. .
I
+

x
j
(u
j
H)
. .
II
=

x
j
(
ji
u
i
)
. .
III

q
j
x
j
..
IV
.
To begin, dene the turbulent kinetic energy per unit mass by k
1
2

i
u

i
. Then, the algebra is as follows:
I)

t
(E) =

t
_

_
e + e

+
1
2
( u
i
+ u

i
)( u
i
+ u

i
)
__
=

t
_

_
e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
_
+
1
2

i
u

i
_
=

t
_

_
e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k
__
=

t
_


E
_
5
II)

x
j
(u
j
H) =

x
j
_
( u
j
+ u

j
)
_

h + h

+
1
2
( u
i
+ u

i
)( u
i
+ u

i
)
__
=

x
j
_
( u
j
+ u

j
)
_

h + h

+
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ u

i
u
i
+
1
2
u

i
u

i
__
=

x
j
_
u
j

h + u
j
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ u
j
k + u

j
h

+ u

j
u

i
u
i
+
1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
_
=

x
j
_
u
j

H + u

j
h

+ u

j
u

i
u
i
+
1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
_
III)

x
j
(
ji
u
i
) =

x
j
(
ji
( u
i
+ u

i
))
=

x
j
_

ji
u
i
+
ji
u

i
_
IV)
q
j
x
j
=
q
j
x
j
Finally, collecting terms and rearranging, the Favre-averaged conservation of energy equation is given by

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
(
ji
u

j
u

i
) u
i
_

x
j
_
q
j
+ u

j
h

_
+

x
j
_

1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+
ji
u

i
_
Examining the Favre-averaged form, one can identify multiple eects of turbulence: the Reynolds stress,
u

j
u

i
, augmenting the viscous stress; the Reynolds heat ux, u

j
h

, augmenting the heat ux; and a

term that is referred to here as the turbulent transport and work. The turbulent transport and work term
contains two eects: transport of TKE by turbulent velocity uctuations (
1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
) and work done by
the viscous stress due to turbulent velocity uctuations (
ji
u

i
).
Summary of Mean Flow Equations For clarity, the full set of equations is collected below:

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0, (5)

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
(
ji
u

j
u

i
), (6)

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
(
ji
u

j
u

i
) u
i
_

x
j
_
q
j
+ u

j
h

_
+

x
j
_

1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+
ji
u

i
_
.
(7)
These equations do not contain any approximations or assumptions beyond those stated in Section 2.2 and
those required for the Navier-Stokes equations to hold. In cases where these assumptions are valid, all errors
are introduced by the approximations used to close the equations.
6
2.4 Newtonian, Perfect Gas Case
To be concrete, the equations developed in Section 2.3 are further restricted to the case of a Newtonian,
thermally and calorically perfect gas. In particular, constitutive laws for the viscous stress tensor and
heat ux vector are shown and thermodynamic relationships are reviewed. In addition, these equations are
averaged.
Viscous Stress Tensor Constitutive Law For a Newtonian uid, the viscous stress tensor is given by

ij
= 2s
ij
+ s
kk

ij
, (8)
where s
ij
=
1
2
_
ui
xj
+
uj
xi
_
is the strain rate tensor, is the dynamic viscosity, and is the second viscosity.
Furthermore, in this work, Stokes hypothesis [18], i.e.,
=
2
3
,
is assumed to hold. Thus, (8) becomes

ij
= 2s
ij

2
3
s
kk

ij
= 2S
ij
, (9)
where S
ij
s
ij

1
3
s
kk

ij
is the deviatoric component of the strain rate tensor.
The Reynolds-averaged viscous stress appears in both the mean momentum and energy equations. Work-
ing in terms of the kinematic viscosity, = /, the Reynolds-averaged viscous stress is given by,

ij
= 2

S
ij
+ 2

ij
.
For simplicity, it is usually assumed that the correlation between the kinematic viscosity and velocity deriva-
tive uctuations is negligibly small. Thus, in the rest of this work, it is assumed that

ij
= 2

S
ij
. (10)
Neglecting the eects of viscosity uctuations is common, although this assumption is not always made
explicitly. At least in some instances, the approximation appears to be supported by DNS [4]. Furthermore,
since the mean viscous and Reynolds stresses always appear together in the mean ow equations, to justify
this assumption it is necessary and sucient to show that the neglected terms are small relative to the
retained portion of the mean viscous stress, 2

S
ij
, or relative to the Reynolds stress, u

i
u

j
.
Thermodynamic Relationships For an ideal gas, the equation of state is
p = RT, (11)
where R = c
p
c
v
is constant. Reynolds averaging (11) gives
p = R

T. (12)
Furthermore, the internal energy and enthalpy are given by
e = c
v
T,
h = e +
p

= c
p
T,
where the constants c
v
and c
p
are the specic heat at constant volume and pressure, respectively. Thus,
e = c
v

T,

h = e +
p

= c
p

T.
7
Heat Flux Constitutive Law Invoking Fouriers law for the heat ux and using the assumption of
constant c
p
gives
q
j
=
T
x
j
=

c
p
h
x
j
=

Pr
h
x
j
, (13)
where is the thermal conductivity and Pr = c
p
/ is the Prandtl number. Assuming Pr is constant and
Reynolds averaging gives
q
j
=
1
Pr
( +

)

x
j
(

h + h

)
=
1
Pr
_

h
x
j
+

x
j
_
.
As with the correlation of kinematic viscosity and velocity gradient uctuations in the viscous stress, it is
convenient to neglect the correlation of the kinematic viscosity and enthalpy gradient uctuations. Thus,
q
j
=

Pr

h
x
j
. (14)
To justify this approximation, it is necessary to show that the neglected terms are small relative to either
those that are retained in the mean heat ux or the Reynolds heat ux.
Sutherlands Law The only remaining unknown function in (9) and (14) is the viscosity, . At relatively
low temperatures (170

1900

K for air), the viscosity is well approximated by Sutherlands law [18]:

=
0
_
T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S
T + S
, (15)
where T is the temperature and
0
, T
0
, and S are constants.
Clearly, the Reynolds-averaged viscous stresssee (10)involves the Reynolds-averaged viscosity. Due
to the nonlinearity of (15), the mean viscosity cannot be computed exactly from the mean temperature
alone. Nevertheless, in much of the RANS/FANS literature and in this work, the approximation
=
0
_

T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S

T + S
, (16)
is used. The right-hand side of this equation is the rst term of a Taylor series expansion of about

T.
Thus, the approximation is valid for small temperature uctuationsi.e., T

T 1. However, generally,
the approximation of the viscosity itself is not of interest. In this case, the small temperature uctuation
condition is sucient but not necessary. Rather, one must show that the contribution of the neglected terms
to the total stress and heat ux is negligible.
Summary of Equations Substituting (10) and (14) into (5) through (7), the mean ow equations are
given by

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0, (17)

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
(2

S
ji
u

j
u

i
), (18)

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
(2

S
ji
u

j
u

i
) u
i
_
+

x
j
_

Pr

h
x
j
u

j
h

_
+

x
j
_

1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+
ji
u

i
_
,
(19)
8
with the following auxiliary equations:
=
0
_

T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S

T + S
,

S
ij
= s
ij

1
3
s
kk

ij
, s
ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
,
p = R

T,

E = e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k, e = c
v

T,

H =

h +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k,

h = c
p

T = e +
p

.
All terms appearing in these equations are closed except for those resulting from turbulent uctuations. In
particular, the unclosed terms are as follows:
1. the Reynolds stress (u

j
u

i
),
2. the Reynolds heat ux (u

j
h

),
3. the turbulent transport and work (
1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+
ji
u

i
), and
4. all instances of the TKE (k).
Closure models for these terms are discussed in Section 3.
3 Common Closure Hypotheses
In this section, the remaining unclosed terms in the FANS equations are examined and the typical closure
hypotheses used in the turbulence modeling literature are described. These hypotheses relate the unclosed
terms to the mean ow through two scalar functions: the eddy viscosity and the TKE, which must be
computed by the turbulence model. Of course, this step represents a drastic simplication which, in general,
renders it impossible to exactly represent the eects of turbulence on the mean ow. Nevertheless, these
approximations are often useful and represent common practice in applied CFD.
Reynolds Stress Tensor The Reynolds stress tensor, u

i
u

j
, appears in both the momentum (6) and
energy (7) equations. It represents the apparent stress seen by the mean ow due to turbulent uctuations.
To close the term, the exact Reynolds stress is replaced by a model Reynolds stress tensor, denoted R
ij
.
All of the turbulence models explored in this work rely on the Boussinesq approximation, which takes the
following form:
R
ij
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
, (20)
where the scalar function,
t
, is known as the eddy viscosity.
Reynolds Heat Flux The Reynolds heat ux vector, u

j
h

, is the apparent heat ux seen by the mean

ow due to the correlation of turbulent uctuations of velocity and enthalpy. The exact Reynolds heat ux
is replaced by a model ux, Q
j
, taking the following form:
Q
j

t

T
x
j
,
where
t
is the eddy thermal conductivity. This function is obtained from the eddy viscosity and a turbulent
Prandtl number, Pr
t
, which is typically assumed to be constant. Specically,

t

c
p

t
Pr
t
.
Thus, in terms of the Favre-averaged enthalpy, the closure hypothesis is
Q
j
=

t
Pr
t

h
x
j
. (21)
9
Turbulent Transport and Work As described in Section 2, the turbulent transport and work terms are

_
u

j
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+ (u

i

ji
).
These terms, which appear in both the the conservation of energy and TKE equationsee Section 5are
replaced by a model ux, F
j
. Generally, for models where the TKE is available, the model ux is computed
using a gradient diusion hypothesis:
F
j
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
, (22)
where
k
is a calibration parameter. However, this approximation may change slightly depending on whether
a stress-limiter is used and the preference of the modeler. More details are given in Section 6.
For models that do not provide the TKE, these terms are usually neglected.
Turbulent Kinetic Energy The TKE is often part of the solution to the turbulence model. In particular,
two equation models are generally formulated in terms of the TKE and a second turbulence propertymost
commonly the dissipation rate, , or a turbulence frequency, . In this case, the TKE closure problem is
resolved naturally. For more details, see the discussions of the TKE equation, in Section 5, and two-equation
models, in Section 6.
For most algebraic and some one-equatione.g., Spalart-Allmarasmodels the TKE is not available as
part of the turbulence model solution. In this case, it is common to neglect the TKEi.e., assume k = 0.
This approach will be taken here unless the resulting model can be shown to be invalid. Alternatively, a
model relating the TKE to the eddy viscosity can be formulatede.g., using Bradshaws assumption [1]and
used to close the TKE terms.
A Comment on Closure Hypotheses It should be noted that, regardless of how the eddy viscosity and
TKE are computed, the closure hypotheses introduced in this section render the resulting models incorrect
in the sense that they are not valid for all turbulent ows. For instance, the assumption inherent in the
Boussinesq approximation is that the deviatoric part of the Reynolds stress is determined by the deviatoric
part of the mean strain rate. This assumption can be shown to be invalid even for some simple owse.g.,
ows with sudden changes in the mean strain rate. However, in many ows of engineering interest, the
closure hypotheses are more reasonable. For example, in a simple shear layer where only the Reynolds shear
stress, u
1
u
2
if x
1
is the ow direction and x
2
runs normal to the layer, is important and u
1
/x
2
is the
dominant mean velocity derivative, the Boussinesq hypothesis reduces to
u
1
u
2
=
t
u
1
x
2
.
In this case, the Boussinesq hypothesis can be thought of as the denition of the eddy viscosity and there is
no approximation at all until a model for
t
is introduced.
Thus, while the closure hypotheses introduced here are clearly inadequate in a general sense, it is impor-
tant to validate models that rely on these hypotheses in the context where they will be applied. This type
of evaluation is the one of the goals of the PECOS validation process.
10
Summary of Equations Using (20), (21), and (22), the mean ow equations become

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0, (23)

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji

2
3
k
ji
_
, (24)

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji
u
i

2
3
k
ji
u
i
_
+

x
j
_
_

Pr
+

t
Pr
t
_

h
x
j
_
+

x
j
_
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
_
.
(25)
The auxiliary equations are unchanged from Section 2.4. The remaining unclosed terms are
t
and k.
4 The Spalart-Allmaras One-Equation Turbulence Model
This section details the Spalart-Allmaras one-equation turbulence model. For the development of the original
model, see [14].
4.1 Closure
The SA model is written directly in terms a of a model pde for the eddy viscosity. Thus, the TKE is not
part of the solution of the model. To close the TKE terms, it is assumed that k = 0. Clearly this assumption
is incorrect. However, this approach will be followed until the resulting model can be invalidated.
4.2 The Original (Incompressible) Model
For clarity, the original model is presented rst. This form of the model was developed in the context
of incompressible ows and will not be implemented in HyFlow. Rather, it serves as a starting point for
development of the forms that will be implemented.
The model is written in terms of a working variable,
sa
. This notation is dierent from that typically
used in the RANS literature for the SA model, where the working variable is denoted . In this work,
denotes the Favre-averaged kinematic viscosity. Thus,
sa
is adopted instead.
Neglecting transition, the original model equations are as follows:

sa
t
+ u
j

sa
x
j
= c
b1
S
sa

sa
c
w1
f
w
_

sa
d
_
2
+
1

x
k
_
( +
sa
)

sa
x
k
_
+
c
b2

sa
x
k

sa
x
k
, (26)
where d is the distance to the nearest no slip wall,

t
=
sa
f
v1
, S
sa
= +

sa

2
d
2
f
v2
, =
_
2

ij

ij
,

ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j

u
j
x
i
_
,
f
v1
=

3

3
+ c
3
v1
, f
v2
= 1

1 + f
v1
, =

sa

,
f
w
= g
_
1 + c
6
w3
g
6
+ c
6
w3
_
1/6
, g = r + c
w2
_
r
6
r
_
, r =

sa
S
sa

2
d
2
,
and c
b1
, c
b2
, c
v1
, , c
w1
, c
w2
, c
w3
, and are calibration parameters.
11
4.3 The Baseline Compressible Model
To begin, (26) is put into conservation form. Multiplying (26) by the mean density, it is straightforward to
show that

t
(
sa
) +

x
j
( u
j

sa
) =c
b1
S
sa

sa
c
w1
f
w

_

sa
d
_
2
+
1

x
k
_
( +
sa
)

sa
x
k
_

( +
sa
)

x
k

sa
x
k
+
c
b2

sa
x
k

sa
x
k
.
(27)
Equation (27) contains a term depending on the density gradient. This term does not appear in eddy viscosity
transport equations derived from two-equation turbulence models [7]. In addition, Roy and Blottner [9]
observed that including the term did not signicantly aect the predictions of the model but did cause
stability problems. For these reasons, this term is dropped from the model equation. Thus, the model
transport equation becomes

t
(
sa
) +

x
j
( u
j

sa
) =c
b1
S
sa

sa
c
w1
f
w

_

sa
d
_
2
+
1

x
k
_
( +
sa
)

sa
x
k
_
+
c
b2

sa
x
k

sa
x
k
.
(28)
The auxiliary relationships and calibration parameters are unchanged from Section 4.2.
4.4 Compressibility Corrections
Alternative forms of the SA model intended to improve predictions in compressible ows are available. For
example, Catris and Aupoix [2] have proposed an alternative form intended to account for density variations
in a high Mach number boundary layer, and Secundov [12, 15] has formulated a correction term that improves
the SA model performance in compressible mixing layers. Documentation of these model forms will be added
prior to their implementation.
5 The Turbulent Kinetic Energy Equation
Many turbulence models rely on a model equation for the TKE. This section begins with the development
of the exact TKE equation in Section 5.1. As in the FANS equations, there are multiple unclosed terms in
the exact equation. The standard closure techniques are reviewed in Section 5.2.
5.1 The Exact TKE Equation
To derive the TKE equation, the instantaneous conservation of momentum equation, (3), is multiplied by
the uctuating velocity vector, u

i
, and Reynolds averaged:
u

i
_

t
(u
i
) +

x
j
(u
j
u
i
)
_
= u

i
_

p
x
i
+

ji
x
j
_
. (29)
To begin, examine the left hand side of (29). By conservation of mass,
u

i
_

t
(u
i
) +

x
j
(u
j
u
i
)
_
= u

i
_

u
i
t
+ u
j
u
i
x
j
_
.
12
Then, decomposing u
i
into mean and uctuating parts,
u

i
_

u
i
t
+ u
j
u
i
x
j
_
= u

i


t
( u
i
+ u

i
) + u

i
u
j

x
j
( u
i
+ u

i
)
= u

i

u

i
t
+ u

i
u
j
u
i
x
j
+ u

i
u
j
u

i
x
j
=

t
_
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+ u

i
u
j
u
i
x
j
+ u
j

x
j
_
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
.
Thus, using conservation of mass and decomposing u
j
into mean and uctuating parts gives
u

i
_

u
i
t
+ u
j
u
i
x
j
_
=

t
_

1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+

x
j
_
( u
j
+ u

j
)
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+ u

i
( u
j
+ u

j
)
u
i
x
j
=

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) +

x
j
_
u

j
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+ u

i
( u
j
+ u

j
)
u
i
x
j
=

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) +

x
j
_
u

j
1
2
u

i
u

i
_
+ u

i
u

j
u
i
x
j
. (30)
Reynolds averaging the right hand side of (29) gives the following:
u

i
_

p
x
i
+

ji
x
j
_
= u

x
i
( p + p

) + u

ji
x
j
= u

i
p
x
i

x
i
(u

i
p

) + p

i
x
i
+

x
j
(u

i

ji
)
ji
u

i
x
j
. (31)
Finally, combining (30) and (31) and rearranging gives the TKE equation:

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =u

i
u

j
u
i
x
j

ji
u

i
x
j
+

x
j
_

1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+ u

i

ji
_
u

i
p
x
i

x
i
(u

i
p

) + p

i
x
i
(32)
5.2 The Model TKE Equation
Examining the right-hand side of (32) reveals two terms that are familiar from the FANS equations. In
particular, closure approximations for the Reynolds stress (u

i
u

j
) and the turbulent transport and work
terms (
1
2
u

j
u

i
u

i
+
ji
u

i
) were given in Section 3. For consistency, the same closure hypotheses must be
used for the TKE equation. The remaining unclosed terms are the dissipation rate and the pressure terms.
The Dissipation Rate The dissipation rate per unit mass is given by
=
ji
u

i
x
j
.
This term represents the rate at which TKE is converted to mean internal energy appears as a positive
source term in the mean internal energy equationdue to turbulent uctuations. It is possible to postulate
algebraic relationships to close this terme.g., = C
D
k
3/2
/ where C
D
is a calibration parameter and is
a turbulence length scale that must be specied. However, it is more common to supply a second pde to
determine the dissipation. This approach is taken by both k- and k- models. In k- models a pde for
is postulated and solved. Thus, the term is closed automatically, although, in the context of compressible
13
ows, more complex formulations that split the dissipation into solenoidal and dilatation components are
available [25, 11].
Alternatively, in k- models a pde for a turbulence frequency /k is postulated. Thus, the following
closure is used:
=

k, (33)
where is determined from the second model pde and

is a calibration parameter.
The Pressure Terms The remaining unclosed terms all involve the pressure:
u

i
p
x
i

x
i
(u

i
p

) + p

i
x
i
.
While closure models for these terms have been proposed [10, 26], it appears that none of these closure
hypotheses have become part of the standard usage of the turbulence models in applied CFD. Thus, until
the resulting models can be invalidated, these terms will be neglected.
The Model TKE Equation Assuming a k- formulation and using (33) and the closure hypotheses
developed in Section 3, the resulting model TKE equation is

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

k +

x
j
_
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
_
. (34)
6 The k- Two-Equation Turbulence Model
This section shows the k- two-equation turbulence model. The model is written in terms of the TKE, k,
and , which has units (time)
1
and is identied as a frequency of the turbulence. Specically, /k.
There are many variations of the k- model, with the initial developments dating to Kolmogorov [3, 16].
Here, two versions of the model will be shown: the Wilcox [23, 24] and Menter [5, 6] formulations.
6.1 Closure
For both versions of the model, the TKE is part of the solution of the model. Thus, unlike the SA model,
there is no issue using k in the closure relationships shown in Section 3. The second component of the model
solution is the turbulence frequency, . On dimensional grounds, one postulates that

t

k

,
and this type of closure is used by many k- models. More recent versions, including both of the models
shown here, have included a stress-limiter, which aims to suppress the Reynolds stress when the TKE
production is larger than the dissipation. Specics of the eddy viscosity calculation are shown for each
model below.
6.2 The Wilcox Model
The Wilcox version of the model has been under development for more than thirty years. For earlier versions
of the model, see [20, 22, 21, 19]. The version described here [23, 24] is, to the best of the authors knowledge,
the lastest available. The primary dierences between this version and previous versions are the addition of
a cross-diusion term in the equation and the stress-limiter.
14
The model equations are as follows:

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

k +

x
j
__
+

_
k
x
j
_
, (35)

t
( ) +

x
j
( u
j
) =

k
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

2
+
d

k
x
j

x
j
+

x
j
__
+
k

_

x
j
_
,
(36)
where
=
o
f

, f

=
1 + 85

1 + 100

ij

jk

S
ki
(

)
3

,

S
ki
= s
ki

1
2
u
m
x
m

ki
,
d
=
_
0,
k
xj

xj
0

do
,
k
xj

xj
> 0
,
and ,
o
,

, ,

, and
do
are calibration parameters.
Finally, the eddy viscosity is given by

t
=
k

, (37)
where
= max
_
, C
lim
_
2

S
ij

S
ij
_
,
and C
lim
is an additional calibration parameter.
Note that Wilcox does not use the stress-limited eddy viscosity in the closure of the turbulent transport
and work terms. Thus, the closure described in Section 3 is replaced by
F
j

_
+

_
k
x
j
,
in both the conservation of energy (25) and TKE (35) equations.
6.3 Menters Shear Stress Transport (SST) Model
The shear stress transport (SST) model combines the Wilcox 1988 [19] version of k- and the standard k-
models into a unied k- formulation. This combination is accomplished by writing the k- model in terms of
k and and then blending the calibration parameters. The goal is a model that performs like the k- model
near walls and like the k- model near boundary layer edges and in free shear layers. In the literature, the
blended model is referred to as the baseline (BSL) model and the BSL model coupled with a stress-limiter
is the SST model.
The SST model equations are as follows:

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

k +

x
j
_
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
_
(38)

t
( ) +

x
j
( u
j
) =

t
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

2
+

x
j
_
( +

t
)

x
j
_
+ 2(1 F
1
)
2
1

k
x
j

x
j
,
(39)
where

and
2
are calibration parameters and F
1
is a blending function. Furthermore,

k
= F
1

k1
+ (1 F
1
)
k2
,

= F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
, = F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
= F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
,
1
=

1

,
2
=

2

,
15
where
k1
,
k2
,
1
,
1
,
2
, and are additional calibration parameters. The blending function is
F
1
= tanh(arg
4
1
)
arg
1
= min
_
max
_

k
0.09d
,
500
d
2

_
,
4
2
k
CD
k
d
2
_
.
where d is the distance to the nearest wall, and CD
k
is the positive part of the cross-diusion term:
CD
k
= max
_
2
2
1

k
x
j

x
j
, 0
_
.
The eddy viscosity is dened by

t
=
a
1
k
max(a
1
, F
2
)
, (40)
where a
1
is another calibration parameter, =
_
2

ij

ij
is the magnitude of the vorticity, and
F
2
= tanh(arg
2
2
),
arg
2
= max
_
2

k
0.09d
,
500
d
2

_
.
Multiple numerical constants appear in the denitions of both arg
1
and arg
2
. It appears that, although
the values vary with the reference, these are not generally treated explicitly as calibration parameters. The
values shown here are taken from [6]. However, in the HyFlow implementation, these values will not be
hardcoded and the parameters may be calibrated if necessary.
7 Equation Summary
This section gives a terse but complete listing of the equations to be implemented for each turbulence model.
7.1 Spalart-Allmaras
The model pdes are

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0,

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji
_
,

t
_

_
e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
__
+

x
j
_
u
j
_

h +
1
2
u
i
u
i
__
=

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji
u
i
_
+

x
j
_
_

Pr
+

t
Pr
t
_

h
x
j
_
,

t
(
sa
) +

x
j
( u
j

sa
) =c
b1
S
sa

sa
c
w1
f
w

_

sa
d
_
2
+
1

x
k
_
( +
sa
)

sa
x
k
_
+
c
b2

sa
x
k

sa
x
k
,
16
where d is the distance to the nearest no slip wall, and
=
0
_

T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S

T + S
,

S
ij
= s
ij

1
3
s
kk

ij
, s
ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
,
p = R

T, e = c
v

T,

h = c
p

T = e +
p

t
=
t
=
sa
f
v1
, S
sa
= +

sa

2
d
2
f
v2
, =
_
2

ij

ij
,

ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j

u
j
x
i
_
,
f
v2
= 1

1 + f
v1
, f
v1
=

3

3
+ c
3
v1
, =

sa

,
f
w
= g
_
1 + c
6
w3
g
6
+ c
6
w3
_
1/6
, g = r + c
w2
_
r
6
r
_
, r =

sa
S
sa

2
d
2
.
The constants c
v
and c
p
are uid properties. The constants
0
, T
0
, S, are the calibration parameters
appearing in Sutherlands law, and c
b1
, c
b2
, c
v1
, , c
w1
, c
w2
, c
w3
, and are the SA model calibration
parameters.
7.2 k- (Wilcox)
The model pdes are

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0,

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji

2
3
k
ji
_
,

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji
u
i

2
3
k
ji
u
i
_
+

x
j
_
_

Pr
+

t
Pr
t
_

h
x
j
_
+

x
j
__
+

_
k
x
j
_
,

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

k +

x
j
__
+

_
k
x
j
_
,

t
( ) +

x
j
( u
j
) =

k
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

2
+
d

k
x
j

x
j
+

x
j
__
+
k

_

x
j
_
,
where
=
0
_

T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S

T + S
,

S
ij
= s
ij

1
3
s
kk

ij
, s
ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
,
p = R

T,

E = e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k, e = c
v

T,

H =

h +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k,

h = c
p

T = e +
p

t
=
k

, = max
_
, C
lim
_
2

S
ij

S
ij
_
,
=
o
f

, f

=
1 + 85

1 + 100

ij

jk

S
ki
(

)
3

,

S
ki
= s
ki

1
2
u
m
x
m

ki
,
d
=
_
0,
k
xj

xj
0

do
,
k
xj

xj
> 0
.
17
The constants c
v
and c
p
are uid properties. The constants
0
, T
0
, S, are the calibration parameters
appearing in Sutherlands law, and

, ,
o
, , and
do
are the k- (Wilcox) calibration parameters.
7.3 k- (Menter/SST)
The model pdes are

t
+

x
i
( u
i
) = 0,

t
( u
i
) +

x
j
( u
j
u
i
) =
p
x
i
+

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji

2
3
k
ji
_
,

t
_


E
_
+

x
j
_
u
j

H
_
=

x
j
_
2( +
t
)

S
ji
u
i

2
3
k
ji
u
i
_
+

x
j
_
_

Pr
+

t
Pr
t
_

h
x
j
_
+

x
j
_
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
_
,

t
( k) +

x
j
( u
j
k) =
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

k +

x
j
_
( +
k

t
)
k
x
j
_

t
( ) +

x
j
( u
j
) =

t
_
2
t

S
ij

2
3
k
ij
_
u
i
x
j

2
+

x
j
_
( +

t
)

x
j
_
+ 2(1 F
1
)
2
1

k
x
j

x
j
,
where
=
0
_

T
T
0
_
3/2
T
0
+ S

T + S
,

S
ij
= s
ij

1
3
s
kk

ij
, s
ij
=
1
2
_
u
i
x
j
+
u
j
x
i
_
,
p = R

T,

E = e +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k, e = c
v

T,

H =

h +
1
2
u
i
u
i
+ k,

h = c
p

T = e +
p

t
=
a
1
k
max(a
1
, F
2
)
, =
_
2

ij

ij
, F
2
= tanh(arg
2
2
), arg
2
= max
_
2

k
0.09d
,
500
d
2

_
,

k
= F
1

k1
+ (1 F
1
)
k2
,

= F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
, = F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
= F
1

1
+ (1 F
1
)
2
,
1
=

1

,
2
=

2

,
F
1
= tanh(arg
4
1
), arg
1
= min
_
arg
2
,
4
2
k
CD
k
d
2
_
, CD
k
= max
_
2
2
1

k
x
j

x
j
, 0
_
,
and d is the distance to the nearest wall. The constants c
v
and c
p
are uid properties. The constants
0
,
T
0
, S, are the calibration parameters appearing in Sutherlands law, and
k1
,
k2
,
1
,
2
,
1
,
2
,

, ,
and a
1
are the SST calibration parameters.
References
[1] P. Bradshaw, D. H. Ferris, and N. P. Atwell. Calculation of boundary layer development using the
turbulent energy equation. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 28(3):593616, 1967.
[2] Stephane Catris and Bertrand Aupoix. Density corrections for turbulence models. Aerospace Science
and Technology, 4:111, 2000.
18
[3] A. N. Kolmogorov. Equations of turbulent motion of an incompressible uid. Izvestia Academy of
Sciences, USSR; Physics, 6(1 and 2):5658, 1942. For english translation, see [16].
[4] Sanjiva K. Lele. Compressibility eects on turbulence. Annual Review of Fluid Mechanics, 26:211254,
1994.
[5] Florian R. Menter. Improved two-equation k- turbulence models for aerodynamics ows. Technical
Memorandum 103975, NASA, 1992.
[6] Florian R. Menter. Two-equation eddy-viscosity turbulence models for engineering applications. AIAA
Journal, 32(8):15981605, 1994.
[7] Florian R. Menter. Eddy viscosity transport equations and their relation to the k- model. Journal of
Fluids Engineering, 119:876884, 1997.
[8] Stephen B. Pope. Turbulent Flows. Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000.
[9] Christopher J. Roy and Fredrick G. Blottner. Assessment of one- and two-equation turbulence models
for hypersonic transitional ows. AIAA Paper 2000-0132, 2000.
[10] S. Sarkar. The pressure-dilatation correlation in compressible ows. Physics of Fluids, A, 4:26742682,
1992.
[11] S. Sarkar, G. Erlebacher, M. Y. Hussaini, and H. O. Kreiss. Analysis and modelling of dilatational
terms in compressible turbulence. Journal of Fluid Mechanics, 227:473493, 1991.
[12] M. Shur, M. Streelets, L. Zaikov, A. Gulyaev, V. Kozlov, and A. Secundov. Comparative numerical
testing of one- and two-equation turbulence models for ows with separation and reattachment. AIAA
Paper 1995-0863, 1995.
[13] Alexander J. Smits and Jean-Paul Dussauge. Turbulent Shear Layers in Supersonic Flow, Second
Edition. Springer, New York, 2006.
[14] P. R. Spalart and S. A. Allmaras. A one-equation turbulence model for aerodynamic ows. La Recherche
Aerospatiale, 1:521, 1994. See also AIAA Paper 1992-439.
[15] Philippe R. Spalart. Trends in turbulence treatments. AIAA Paper 2000-2306, 2000.
[16] D. Brian Spalding. Kolmogorovs two-equation model of turbulence. Proceedings of the Royal Society:
Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 434(1890):211216, 1991.
[17] H. Tennekes and J. L. Lumley. An Introduction to Turbulence. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA, 1972.
[18] F. M. White. Visous Fluid Flow, Second Edition. McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991.
[19] D. C. Wilcox. Reassessment of the scale determining equation for advanced turbulence models. AIAA
Journal, 26(11):12991310, 1988.
[20] D. C. Wilcox and I. E. Alber. A turbulence model for high speed ows. In Proceedings of the 1972 Heat
Transfer and Fluid Mechanics Institute, Stanford, CA, 1974. Stanford University Press.
[21] D. C. Wilcox and M. W. Rubesin. Progress in turbulence modeling for complex ow elds including
eects of compressibility. Technical Paper 1517, NASA, 1980.
[22] D. C. Wilcox and R. M. Traci. A complete model of turbulence. AIAA Paper 1976-351, 1976.
[23] David C. Wilcox. Turbulence Modeling for CFD, Third Edition. DCW Industries, Inc., La Ca nada, CA,
2006.
19
[24] David C. Wilcox. Formulation of the k- turbulence model revisited. AIAA Journal, 46(11):28232838,
2008.
[25] Otto Zeman. Dilatation dissipation: The concept and application in modeling compressible mixing
layers. Physics of Fluids, A, 2(2):178188, 1990.
[26] Otto Zeman. A new model for super/hypersonic turbulent boundary layers. AIAA Paper 93-0897, 1993.
20